[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
|
Ian, Rich, Ed, Jean
openArchitectureWare has been a project which has started independent of
Eclipse and has been integrated into GMT at some point. Hence it does have
its own brand and a quite large community including a webpage with a forum
on it. Just to clarify, oAW is driven by individuals, not by a company. Most
of the developers are not paid for what they do to oAW, at least not
directly. It is one of the purposes of GMT to provide a way of integrating
promising new or existing projects into the Eclipse universe.
However, we are aware that for openArchitectureWare this is a temporary
state: at the moment we are in the process of splitting oAW into several
pieces that will end up in various Eclipse Modeling project, dropping the
openArchitectureWare name in the process.
For example, the process has been finished for the Modeling Workflow Engine
(MWE) which can now be found in EMFT and is being removed from
openArchitectureWare. If you have a look at the code and the documentation
youll find no references to openArchitectureWare anymore. The same will be
true for our Xpand contribution to the model-to-text component; it is
currently in the process of being migrated to M2T.
After we finished this process, openArchitectureWare will be much less
important. Our goal is to keep the "brand" oAW as a kind of "distribution"
of well-cooperating Eclipse modeling components, combined with a set of more
experimental modeling related tools. We hope to finish this process within
the next few weeks.
I'd just want to make one remark w/r/t the branding of components. I think
the modeling project is different from the rest of the Eclipse projects.
Here we have e.g. a project called Model-to-model. It contains several
languages (components), basically doing the same. It is ok to have these
different languages with the same functionality. However, it is important to
show the user when he should/could use which component. Thus, in EMP
components are much more independent from each other than in all other
Eclipse projects. I think it is good here to have a little branding (within
a limited range, I agree) which gives these components an identity. And
helps the users to distinguish them
Best regards,
Bernd
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Bernd Kolb
(b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx)
http://www.kolbware.de
--
KolbWare
(Beratung & Coaching)
Bernd Kolb
Franz-Marc Str. 35
89520 Heidenheim
Mobil: 0163/7321605
From: Richard Gronback [mailto:richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 7:40 PM
To: Ian Skerrett; ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx, PMC members mailing list; Bernd
Kolb; Markus Voelter
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
Thanks for the ATL observation, Ian. I was under the impression that our
identity crisis components were all within GMT. ATL has graduated from
GMT recently, as have several components of oAW, but I see they still have a
reference to the ATLAS Group on their page. This should be removed, along
with other references such as the Acknowledgement section at the bottom of
this page: http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/usecases/webapp.modeling/ Of
course, the logos are not what you mean, right? We have lots of logos in
use within Modeling.
Until such time there is a policy for advertising external entities
(commercial, academic, or otherwise) on the Eclipse.org website, I agree
that all references should be removed. As Ed mentioned, you wont find
links to IBM or Borland on the EMF or GMF sites.
Regarding oAW, we have had discussions with them and decided the most
painless approach was to require they strip their oAW identity when
graduating to other modeling projects, also as Ed mentioned. The Xpand and
Workflow components are undergoing a namespace refactoring as they migrate,
and well make sure there are no oAW on the M2T and EMFT websites. Well
certainly try to speed up this process.
Another timely topic is the recent announcement of the oAW 4.2 release (
http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/oaw/news/index.php and
http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/oaw/download/). I dont recall a release review
taking place for this component (or ever for GMT), and I see they are still
providing links to download from www.openarchitectureware.org on their
download page. Hopefully, we can correct this ASAP.
Thanks,
Rich
On 10/19/07 1:12 PM, "Ian Skerrett" <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I would suggest is that the components of GMT should not have a
logo/graphic and have a descriptive name not a nickname. I think this would
go a long way to improving the situation. Btw, this goes for all the
modeling sub-projects, for instance http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/
Having all these different logos in my opinion conveys a perception that
there is no strategy or integration between the components or the projects.
My 2 cents
.
Ian
________________________________________
From: jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jean
Bezivin
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:48 PM
To: PMC members mailing list
Cc: ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx; Bjorn Freeman-Benson;
modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
I agree with you.
I also agree that we have to improve much the organization of GMT.
For oAW matters, I will transmit these remarks to Markus Voelter.
I will discuss with him directly next week at OOPSLA because
he will be there.
Bjorn, will you be at OOPSLA and if yes would it be possible
to have a short meeting with Markus to stress the importance
of what has been said?
Best regards,
Jean
On 10/19/07, Ed Merks <merks@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ian,
I'll draw Nick's attention to that link gone astray...
I agree with you. As the various parts of the oAW technology are
incorporated into the other projects, like Xpand into M2T and MWE into
EMFT, I'll ask folks to avoid any non-Eclipse branding on the site. You
won't find IBM/Rational branding nor Borland branding at Eclipse, so we
ought not be to seeing anything that isn't part of Eclipse's branding.
We'll queue up this topic for discussion at the next PMC meeting.
It would be good to improve GMT's image as well. What are your thoughts on
this Jean?
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Ian Skerrett"
< ian.skerrett@ecl
ipse.org <http://ipse.org> >
To
Sent by: <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
modeling-pmc-boun cc
ces@xxxxxxxxxxx "'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
< bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
10/19/2007 12:06 [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web
PM site
Please respond to
ian.skerrett@ecli
pse.org <http://pse.org> ; Please
respond to
PMC members
mailing list
<modeling-pmc@ecl
ipse.org <http://ipse.org> >
Modeling PMC,
Today, I was looking at the open Achitectureware project and in general the
GMT project. I don?t usually provide feedback on project specific
branding and marketing but I thought compelled to do so in this case.
IMHO, from a branding and marketing perspective, the open Architectureware
project looks out of place in the context of the Eclipse community. They
essentially look like they have parachuted in their existing project into
an Eclipse project web page. They actually also seem to have another
project web site http://www.openarchitectureware.org/. I find it all very
confusing and probably detrimental to the Eclipse brand.
If I look at the GMT site, it seems like the open architectureware scenario
plays out again and again. I see lots of project logos and cool names
that seem to have very little to do with Eclipse? The perception I am left
with is that GMT is hovering up existing modeling projects but not really
integrating them into Eclipse? I think what you are doing is creating an
incubator for new modeling projects, which is great, but in my opinion what
you are communicating is something very different and will hurt the
perception of the overall modeling project.
As I said, I usually don?t provide this type of feedback but in this case I
just had to say something. I?d be happy to discuss further and if you
want.
Btw, when I went to try to find the PMC mailing list, the link on this page
http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/ points to
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emft-dev
Ian
Ian Skerrett
Director of Marketing
Eclipse Foundation
613-224-9461 ext. 227
blog: ianskerrett.wordpress.com <http://ianskerrett.wordpress.com>
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
--
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215
